CompaRNA - on-line benchmarks of RNA structure prediction methods
Home

Methods
Datasets
Rankings
RNA 2D Atlas

Help
FAQ

Contact us
RSS feeds
Twitter

Table of contents:

  1. Overview

  2. Performance Plots

  3. Performance of RNASampler(seed) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

  4. Performance of IPknot - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

  5. Compile and download dataset for RNASampler(seed) & IPknot [.zip] - may take several seconds...


Overview

Metric RNASampler(seed) IPknot
MCC 0.779 > 0.757
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.774 ± 0.092 > 0.734 ± 0.130
Sensitivity 0.659 < 0.738
Positive Predictive Value 0.921 > 0.778
Total TP 442 < 495
Total TN 413762 > 413606
Total FP 105 < 255
Total FP CONTRA 9 < 45
Total FP INCONS 29 < 96
Total FP COMP 67 < 114
Total FN 229 > 176
P-value 3.51046461328e-06

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of RNASampler(seed) and IPknot. Positive Predictive Value (PPV) is plotted against sensitivity. Each dot represents a single test of each method. See tables below for raw data (individual counts for RNASampler(seed) and IPknot).

  2. Average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCC) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were plotted for different RNA families, for which at least 3 members were present in the benchmarking dataset. 'n' denotes the number of MCCs used to calculate the average and CI. See tables below for raw data (individual counts for RNASampler(seed) and IPknot).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for RNASampler(seed) and IPknot. The whiskers correspond to 95% confidence intervals (CIs). 'n' denotes the number of MCCs used to calculate average MCCs and CIs. See tables below for raw data (individual counts for RNASampler(seed) and IPknot).

^top





Performance of RNASampler(seed) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RNASampler(seed)

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 442
Total TN 413762
Total FP 105
Total FP CONTRA 9
Total FP INCONS 29
Total FP COMP 67
Total FN 229
Total Scores
MCC 0.779
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.774 ± 0.092
Sensitivity 0.659
Positive Predictive Value 0.921
Nr of predictions 12

^top



2. Individual counts for RNASampler(seed) [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
RFA_00606 0.44 0.36 0.54 14 21295 18 7 5 6 25
RFA_00620 0.52 0.44 0.63 17 21918 15 2 8 5 22
RFA_00626 0.80 0.64 1.00 56 56560 5 0 0 5 31
RFA_00627 0.77 0.63 0.93 55 56894 8 0 4 4 32
RFA_00628 0.78 0.64 0.95 55 57233 12 0 3 9 31
RFA_00630 0.77 0.66 0.90 57 56890 15 0 6 9 30
RFA_00814 0.87 0.78 0.97 32 25167 6 0 1 5 9
RFA_00815 0.88 0.78 1.00 32 24499 8 0 0 8 9
RFA_00816 0.86 0.76 0.97 31 23188 6 0 1 5 10
RFA_00817 0.86 0.76 0.97 31 21913 1 0 1 0 10
RFA_00818 0.86 0.73 1.00 30 20271 6 0 0 6 11
RFA_00819 0.88 0.78 1.00 32 27934 5 0 0 5 9

^top



Performance of IPknot - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for IPknot

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 495
Total TN 413606
Total FP 255
Total FP CONTRA 45
Total FP INCONS 96
Total FP COMP 114
Total FN 176
Total Scores
MCC 0.757
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.734 ± 0.130
Sensitivity 0.738
Positive Predictive Value 0.778
Nr of predictions 12

^top



2. Individual counts for IPknot [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
RFA_00606 0.69 0.67 0.72 26 21285 20 7 3 10 13
RFA_00620 0.60 0.59 0.61 23 21907 28 1 14 13 16
RFA_00626 0.89 0.85 0.94 74 56537 14 0 5 9 13
RFA_00627 0.69 0.66 0.73 57 56875 35 4 17 14 30
RFA_00628 0.95 0.90 1.00 77 57214 14 0 0 14 9
RFA_00630 0.82 0.75 0.89 65 56880 14 0 8 6 22
RFA_00814 0.89 0.88 0.90 36 25160 11 0 4 7 5
RFA_00815 0.57 0.61 0.54 25 24485 28 5 16 7 16
RFA_00816 0.82 0.85 0.80 35 23176 12 8 1 3 6
RFA_00817 0.23 0.24 0.22 10 21900 38 11 24 3 31
RFA_00818 0.69 0.68 0.70 28 20261 15 9 3 3 13
RFA_00819 0.96 0.95 0.98 39 27926 26 0 1 25 2

^top


Matthews Correlation Coeffient, Sensitivity and Positive Predictive Value have been calculated based on the paper by Gardener & Giegerich, 2004.